Create account

replied 2915d
Channels are good for some things, LN is just a load of bollox, it's not P2P, and is nothing more than fractional reserve 2.0 in the making.
1 / 9 1
replied 2915d
So if LN is bad, what kind of channels would you prefer? Just simple channels without routing?
replied 2915d
Yes, payment channels have many use cases, even centralised routing though a single hub is not so bad for certain use cases. But is LN exclusive to BTC?
1
888
replied 2915d
No it isn't, that's why what they are doing is a very stupid approach for their coin's survival. And yes I agree: in some cases centralization doesn't matter much, though we.....
replied 2915d
... shouldn't be forced into it.
1
567
replied 2915d
For stuff like game play where you deposit funds to use in game, although no real routing as just 2 tx with main hub, but tokeda does this better with token issuer adjusting balances
replied 2914d
I haven't looked much into Tokeda. Doesn't it settle balance on the BCH blockchain?
1
replied 2915d
Exactly, if LN can be used by multiple coins, why is BTC needed? They will just start accepting alt X (fiat tokens) to open channels cheaper than on chain BTC fee & then why use BTC?
replied 2915d
That's right, Lightning Network will be equally insecure for all coins.
2
replied 2914d
Exactly. LN won't save BTC - it will make it irrelevant.
1


About Privacy Terms Stats